Own a flat? Think again.

[IR35 Avoider]

I was aware that it was possible for a lease to be cancelled if you breached the terms, say by not paying the management charge on your flat.

It's outrageous that the law does not require any profit after the debt and legal costs are paid to be returned to the former leaseholder.

I think it says something frightening about human nature that so many people are willing to try and justify it, or even just shrug it off. I think when people realise they are subject to some frightening consequence over which they have little control, they invent reasons why the victims deserve their fate, in order to make themselves feel safer.

[IR35 Avoider]

If you get the backing of the majority of the leaseholders you could do what we did for my place in London and do a share of freehold. Essentially we setup a LTD. company that owns the freehold and then we issue a limited number of shares so that the leaseholders can become shareholders of that company. I've found it to work well but it depends on the strength of the board of directors but generally as they live in the building too they have a vested interested in keeping on top of things.

Not sure how that solves the problem. I own a share of the leasehold, it is worth about 1% of what I would lose if the lease were cancelled. (And in fact there are legal clauses that mean that the shares are compulsorily transferred with the lease. The freehold shares that should have been transferred to me from the previous owner when I bought were overlooked, and for about £200 in legal fees I had the shares compulsorily reassigned to me a year or two later. The former owner was uncontactable in any case, however there was no need to contact him to transfer the shares to me.)

[SueEllen]

I think it says something frightening about human nature that so many people are willing to try and justify it, or even just shrug it off. I think when people realise they are subject to some frightening consequence over which they have little control, they invent reasons why the victims deserve their fate, in order to make themselves feel safer.

So because she decided to ignore letters from the court she should keep her flat?

If she hadn't ignored the first lot of court letters then it's extremely likely we wouldn't be discussing this case now.

The issue would have been sorted out in the first hearing. Her solicitor would have advised her to pay the ground rent and service charges immediately so the freeholder's case could be dismissed. In fact she wouldn't have needed a solicitor as lots of organisations e.g. LEASE, CAB would have told her to pay up immediately to halt the proceedings.

In lots of court cases one side or the other tries to pretend they didn't receive correspondence. However most people are not stupid enough to pretend they didn't receive court letters.

Ignoring court letters means you think the law doesn't apply to you. Anything you do subsequently means you are on the back foot in the legal process.

So unless you have a good reason such as were hospitalised or out of the country, you have no excuse in not getting court letters and dealing with them as directed.

[SueEllen]

When Paddy does not like some UK court decision then one can safely back the other side

He interprets it as it is OK to ignore:
1. Letters from the other party who have a legal right to ask you for money
2. Letters from the courts

There as I interpret as you definitely don't ignore letters from the court as judges will treat you badly in subsequent hearings. He doesn't understand that this is why individuals who can pay up when they get a court summons.